There are so many of these processes which are so difficult that they border on the outright criminal, but the FTC goes after Amazon because it is a big political target to hit. Maybe from a utilitarian perspective it makes sense.
You don't think there's any political reason they are going after Amazon rather than, say, the New York Times? Just the impartial watchmen of Democracy studiously promoting the adherence to regulation here?
There's no obvious reason to suspect a political motivation. That Amazon is an enormous retailer, and newspapers are not, seems like rather sufficient explanation for why the Federal Trade Commission might pay more attention to one than the other.
There are ~10 million NYT subscribers. There are ~160 million Amazon Prime subscribers.
Bad practices by NYT impact 3% of Americans. Bad practices by Amazon impact 48% of Americans.
You can be cynical and say that going after Amazon is political because more voters are impacted, but at the end of the day it seems reasonable to go after the biggest target where the biggest impact can be made to benefit Americans.
Maybe it's because one is an online bazaar of Chinese plastic crap that uses dark patterns to get people to sign up, and the other is a news organization that doesn't?
If successful, it probably sets precedent a lot more effectively than going after smaller targets. Amazon won't care if the FTC goes after some small company; but the small company will probably care if the FTC wins against Amazon.
